This is your future under Jim Harbaugh
Tired Harbaugh defensive players faking injuries to slow down better teams:
Ranked, one- to three-loss teams losing decisively to mobile QBs under more sophisticated offenses:
We are all frustrated with our won-loss record under Rich Rodriguez. But if we can get the defense fixed, we have a shot to be the next Oregon instead of the next Stanford. Kudos to Harbaugh for doing so much at Stanford, with their admissions standards et al. - not trying to downplay that achievement. But it is far from clear that he would have that record if he was playing our schedule every year. I have spent a lifetime as a Michigan fan rooting for 9-3 and 8-4 and the occasional 10-2 teams that almost always lost when it counted the most.
I, for one, am willing to go through this difficult period in order to take our program to a level where we are consistently contending for MNC titles, rather than winning Big Ten titles and losing bowl games. I am not nostalgic for that era of consistent disappointment, and I dread consigning another generation of Michigan fans to the same fate.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:01 PM ^
Not only is Rich Rod incapable of coaching a Big Ten-level defense, I question whether he's capable of coaching an offense that has what it takes to properly execute in games against the league's top teams. Notice I haven't even mentioned special teams...
November 27th, 2010 at 11:19 PM ^
If Rich ends up being fired, do you support keeping Barwis around?
November 27th, 2010 at 11:05 PM ^
How do you know that JH would only give us top 20 seasons at UM? He's got Stanford top 10. FREAKING STANFORD. And they're going to get better IMO. His only loss this year is against a very good Oregon team.
And how do you know that RR will get UM to MNC level? That's about as logical statement as JH only being capable of mediocirty.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:02 PM ^
Most teams -- not all, but most -- have a significant drop-off when they lose their high-end, Heisman-contending starting senior QB. But maybe Harbaugh is so awesome that this won't happen to Stanford.
November 29th, 2010 at 9:35 AM ^
Luck is a redshirt sophomore.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:00 AM ^
Luck isn't graduating. But he is going to the NFL. Right now he is #1 on the NFL draft board:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/rankings?&action=upsell&appRedirec…
November 27th, 2010 at 11:09 PM ^
Given that RR has fielded the three worst defenses in school history, and that he seems determined to turn every DC he has into a Jeff Casteel clone (without really understanding what Casteel did to make the 3-3-5 work), I have grave doubts that he can field a national-championship caliber defense.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:24 PM ^
What the makes you think that Harbaugh is incapable of fielding a team that will contend for MNCs????
November 27th, 2010 at 11:35 PM ^
If I understand the OP correctly, because his team was not as good as Oregon this year, he can never win a national championship.
In other news, apparently no team other than Oregon will ever win a national championship ever again.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:42 AM ^
November 28th, 2010 at 1:44 AM ^
But sober up first. I think when you do, you'll realize that while you may disagree with me, my arguments are hardly "fucking dumb." They are representative of a lot of thoughtful supporters of this program. From my vantage point, I see a lot more drunken rants and ad hominem from the anti-RR, pro-Harbaugh side than vice-versa.
November 28th, 2010 at 2:16 AM ^
Guess you can see anything you want.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:17 PM ^
Compared to the comments that have been directed at me personally, I think I've been quite restrained and polite. The evidence speaks for itself either way.
I get that you all are upset about this season, even though most of us understood that 7-5 was likely from the start.
But here are for me, the seminal disappointing memories of a generation of Michigan football:
- 1986: Undefeated, #2 Michigan losing to Rickey Foggie, an unheralded mobile QB from Minnesota. (The game that prompted Harbaugh's guarantee about beating OSU.)
- 1987: #9 Michigan losing to #16 Notre Dame. (Tim Brown won the Heisman.)
- 1988: #9 Michigan losing to Tony Rice, an unheralded mobile QB from #13 Notre Dame (who went on to win the MNC). Losing to #1 Miami the following week, blowing a 16-point lead in the 4th quarter due to conservative playcalling. (But hey, we won the Big Ten!)
- 1989: #2 Michigan losing to #1 Notre Dame, and their mobile QB named Tony Rice. Rocket Ismail returning two kicks for TDs because Schembechler thought it would have been wimpy not to kick right to him. #3 Michigan losing to #12 USC in the Rose Bowl that year. (But hey, we won the Big Ten!)
- 1990: #4 Michigan losing to #1 Notre Dame again. Losing to MSU because of the no-call pass interference against Desmond. Bad luck that year. (But hey, we won the Big Ten!)
- 1991: We finally beat ND (Desmond's epic TD grab in the end zone). But we get schooled by Florida State and a mobile QB named Charlie Ward, 51-31, making it clear how far we have to go before being an MNC-contending team. (But hey, we won the Big Ten!)
- 1992: 9-0-3. Woohoo! We're undefeated! And we won the Big Ten!
- 1993: Michigan, ranked #3 in the preseason, goes 8-4 with loses to ND, MSU, Illinois, and Wisconsin. (But hey, we beat OSU!)
- 1994: Michigan, ranked #4, loses to #7 Colorado and its mobile QB named Kordell Stewart. Another 8-4 year, but this one ending in a loss to OSU. Moeller is fired.
- 1995: Woohoo! 9-4!
- 1996: Woohoo! 8-4! Fan base agitates for Lloyd Carr to get fired.
- 1997: Wohooo 12-0! A dream season. Lloyd has M coaching job for life.
- 1998: Michigan, ranked #5, loses to #22 ranked Notre Dame and its unheralded mobile QB named Jarious Jackson. The following week, they lose to #19 Syracuse and its unheralded mobile QB named Donovan McNabb.
- 1999: Two disappointing losses to MSU and Illinois, capped off by the epic Tom Brady Orange Bowl against Alabama.
- 2000: A team not unlike our 2010 team: a record-setting offense with a poor defense. A 54-51 loss to Northwestern encapsulates a season that began with a preseason #6 ranking but ends at 9-3.
- 2001: 8-4. Drew Henson goes to the Yankees, leaving John Navarre in charge. Preseason rank: #12. The run of losses to OSU begins. Woohoo!
- 2002: 10-3 with losses to ND, Iowa, and OSU. Woohoo!
- 2003: Losses to Oregon, Iowa, and #1 USC. 10-3. Woohoo!
- 2004: Losses to ND, OSU and a mobile QB named Troy Smith, and Texas with a mobile QB named Vince Young. 9-3. Considering all the true freshmen on this team, not a terrible result. Woohoo!
- 2005: 7-5 despite a preseason ranking of #4. Woohoo!
- 2006: One of the great recent M teams ends sourly, with losses to OSU and USC. A young website called MGoBlog is lacerated with criticism of M's unprepared defense and predictable offense.
- 2007: Losses to mobile QBs named Armanti Edwards and Dennis Dixon. MGoBlog lacerated with criticism of M's unprepared defense and predictable offense. M coaching job turned down by Chuck Schiano, Kirk Ferentz, and Les Miles. 9-4. Woohoo!
So let's sum up the last ten years of the Bo-Mo-Lloyd era: 10-3, 10-2, 9-3, 8-4, 10-3, 10-3, 9-3, 7-5, 11-2, 9-4. That's 2 two-loss seasons, 5 three-loss seasons, 2 four-loss seasons, and 1 five-loss season, for an average of 3.2 losses a year. If you prefer measuring 1986 to 2007, the average is 3.0.
If you're nostalgic for this era, fine -- let's just make sure we're not imagining what the old era was all about.
If you think Harbaugh will do better than the old Bo coaching tree, then it would be good to have some plausible answers as to why. Vitriol about "fucking morons" is not persuasive.
November 28th, 2010 at 5:59 PM ^
3-9, 5-7, 7-5 to all those horrible years you list. Which is just stupid. There's been nothing that you have presented (like you expect the Harbaugh people to), or more importantly, has been presented on the field to say that Rich will be any better. In fact, he'd have to be INSANELY better to not end up being worse, overall. What is making people doubt you is that you have unbelievable expectations for the program where 40 years of consistency was just all disappointment to you, but you cavalierly accept horrible results, because you have faith (really nothing else) that it will go from disaster to a golden age never seen here before.
And your sample size is small. You may be replying politely, but I can find just as many STFU ROD WILL BE BACK posts all over the board as you can find people going YAY HARBAUGH. So your assertion was ridiculous.
November 28th, 2010 at 7:51 PM ^
By the nature of the situation, the anti-RR faction is angrier than the pro-RR faction. If it weren't that way, it would make no sense. Why would the people who want RR to stay be angrier than the people who want him fired?
Anyway, what really matters is having an actual rational discussion about the pros and cons of hiring Harbaugh, and I appreciate your contributions to that discussion. So, to your point:
But you're saying you prefer 3-9, 5-7, 7-5 to all those horrible years you list. Which is just stupid. There's been nothing that you have presented (like you expect the Harbaugh people to), or more importantly, has been presented on the field to say that Rich will be any better. In fact, he'd have to be INSANELY better to not end up being worse, overall. What is making people doubt you is that you have unbelievable expectations for the program where 40 years of consistency was just all disappointment to you, but you cavalierly accept horrible results, because you have faith (really nothing else) that it will go from disaster to a golden age never seen here before.
You guys keep citing RR's record. Are you of the opinion that Harbaugh would have done better with the 2008 Michigan roster, or even the 2009 one, with two true freshmen at quarterback? As to the assertion that I am going on faith: Is it so hard to imagine that a defense of upperclassmen, rather than freshmen, will be better than the one we have today? That an offense of upperclassmen will be better than the one we have today? I am plenty unhappy about the last three years, believe me. But I do believe that RR on offense plus cleaning house on defense is the best way for M to be successful in the future. Why do you anti-RR guys find that so objectionable?
November 29th, 2010 at 9:32 AM ^
Yes, the people who want Rich gone are angrier about the RESULTS than those who don't, but I think both are equally angry about the situation, and the other side's reaction. What does the pro Rich Rod side have to be angry about? Well, the fact that the coach they think should be retained, and has done a great job, may be canned, and for unjust reasons (by their thinking). And they're mad that there's a certain segment they feel is making this happen by all the "ARGGGHHH FIRE RICH ROD". (I mean, I don't wan to name name's, but you've been around here, you can see the STFU, I HOPE YOU DIE IN A FIRE stuff...and it's almost always from blind Rich Rod supporters. The Fire crowd may have the troll contingent on their side, but in anger and rudeness, it's at minimum even).
To your second paragraph, it may get heated, but frankly, I enjoy a good argument, and don't mind mixing it up. I may think your ideas are out there in this case (not so much that Rich should be retained...but that Harbaugh is more doomed to mediocrity than Rich) but you conduct a fair discussion. If I thought you were just an idiot, I wouldn't respond, and probably just give out a rare neg.
I'm citing Rich Rod's record not in comparison to Harbaugh's...I'm citing it in comparison to all those winning years MICHIGAN has had that you said were so much more awful than the Rich Rod regime. And if you want to say those prior years show that the prior system (which we don't actually know Harbaugh would run or not...he's shown to be able to adapt to his talent) was incapable of winning a National Title here, I show you what Rich has done here, and ask what has been shown to say that it will be any MORE effective here? (Not CAN it be effective, because I think a variety of systems can....but why has those piss poor results shown it can be more so than what Michigan, or Harbaugh, or frankly anyone else has shown).
2008 what if's are kinda pointless, because we're talking about taking over NOW. Harbaugh wasn't as experienced in 2008, and we don't know how a different coach coming in would have changed things that changed that year. If 2010 Harbaugh comes into 2008 Michigan, does he do better? Well, does his system, and his style, and make Ryan Mallet stay if he sees Andrew Luck projected as a high draft pick? If he keeps Loeffler as a QB coach? (Which in turn probably keeps Arrington around). Even if not, do all those 5th year senior and Boren linemen stay, so the line doesn't blow? Does Threet get to play in a system conducive to his talents, so he's at least the serviceable QB he is at ASU, thus not having to have two new starters the next two years? We'll never know, so it's not a fair question to ask. But yes, I think we would have done better. But that's not what matters. I care how good we are in 2011. I care more about how good we are in 2012-2020+. It's what's the best long term solution.
I say you have faith in that you posit as part of your argument that to be winning national titles every year (slight exaggeration) that you will need a great defense (not just an average one, which will win 10 games a year). And I do think it's nothing but faith to say that this defense is on any sort of track towards "great". It's been a downward trend every year. For all the bare cupboard, that coincides with the old system players graduating. Because everyone talks system, gameday adjustments, PR ability....the think that has concerned me the most has been our recruiting. I do think our defense (and offense) will get better as they players get older. That's natural. The problem is, I think the majority of them just aren't that good by Michigan standards. Maybe MSU standards. Definitely Purdue standards. But we're not fighting for guys OSU wants. For every low ranked guy who develops into more, there's a high rank guy who's busted, and then you have a bunch of lower ranked guys living up to their ranking. It's not the magically development, or the wondrous recruiting we've heard about. The record is part of the explanation, but that's a downward spiral - can't recruit better because our record is bad; record stays bad because we don't have the talent. The only way out of that is to overachieve as a coach, and put up a record better than your talent (which great coaches occasionally do), or be a lights out recruiter and get kids to come even if the record isn't up to par (which great recruiters do). We haven't done either. So what could a change possibly do? Improve our recruiting long term, and get the talent in here to compete. Can Harbaugh do that? I don't know for sure, but he's done a good job recruiting at the toughest place in the country to get players into.
But in conclusion, why do I think the pro-Rich crowd is angry? Because they throw out to anyone who disagrees with anything they say that it's part of that "anti-RR guys" stuff. And they're angry by the fact that it's not just angry RR guys anymore. It used to be just guys who really didn't like him (for usually silly reasons) that voiced concerns. But now a lot of the middle is really concerned with his performance, and that makes the pro side a minority. And after the somewhat religious fever that some have defended him with, they've invested too much to be wrong. Those of us in the middle don't want to be "right"...we want Michigan football not to suck anymore. And we may like Rich, may like some of what he brings, but can see that he's pretty much failed at what he's done so far....underachievements to be picked out, but no overachievements to offset it. That's what great coaches do...sometimes they have down years...sometimes they coach them up...it balances out. But we've only had the former. Does that mean he should go? I really don't know. I like him, I like his offensive system....but I have problems with the way he reacts and handles some things too, and I'm a defense guy. Still believe that wins championships. And it's not that we're offensive oriented, but our defense has been as historically bad as people want to claim our offense has been good. But luckily it's not my decision. If Dave thinks he should bring him back, he'll be back, and we'll root for him to succeed, because if he doesn't, then we're really screwing the pooch. If Dave thinks a change needs to be made, I'll root for the new guy (I'm not really a Harbaugh fan, off the field...but at this point I'm at, if not him, then WHO? And if him, when but NOW?), and hope that doesn't screw us over either. There are no absolutes. But I'm just sick of not being competitive, no more losing. Brandon has to do what will fix the ship. Because that will define his legacy as much as anything. I hope he's right, either way.
November 29th, 2010 at 4:34 PM ^
I agree with most of what you say here. As I've said before, I do believe RR deserves his fair share of blame for inattention to the defense. But I also agree with him when he says the worst is behind us. IF, that is, we finally put together a functional defensive coaching staff. If RR isn't interested in doing that, out of loyalty to his guys, then he deserves the result, whatever it may be.
I used to think that DB was going to keep RR for sure, but I'm not sure anymore, especially after reading this article. As you say, the lack of competitiveness against Wisconsin and OSU this year has alienated people. I for one hope RR gets one more year. If Michigan is truly Harbaugh's dream job, then he'll still want it next year. I remain unconvinced that Harbaugh is the man to lead us to MNCs, and am surprised that others are so sure of it (Willingham) -- but at least we can all take solace in the fact that a smart, competent guy is going to make the decision one way or the other.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:39 AM ^
RR, provided he can bring the defense back to Michigan standards, will contend for MNCs.
You have no facts whatsoever upon which to base this statement. This is nothing more than dogma.
November 27th, 2010 at 10:53 PM ^
Hold on. If Harbaugh stays at Stanford, do we have to get the Oregon uniforms?
November 27th, 2010 at 11:03 PM ^
Oregon unis PLUS added camo accents. And Reebok will be our new sponsor. Pumps for all.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:04 PM ^
November 27th, 2010 at 10:57 PM ^
It's too bad people can't see the big picture. It sucks going through this, but no way should rr go.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:37 PM ^
Can you think of another coach who lost 20+ games in his first three seasons, then went on to win a national title at that same school?
November 28th, 2010 at 12:21 AM ^
November 27th, 2010 at 10:58 PM ^
It was either watch a movie with wifey called "The Kids Are Alright" or read MGoBlog for entertainment tonight. I'm feeling like I made the right choice. This is great entertainment! I've pretty much forgotten the game today and looking forward to the bowel game.
Whatever happens with the coach situation, I'll still love this team (these kids are alright) and be rooting for them again next year and as long as I live and I've already exceeded my life expectation so it's all gravy from here. Peace.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:06 PM ^
+1, my friend.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:05 PM ^
Since Thanksgiving night, I've played in plenty of "bowel games".
November 27th, 2010 at 11:00 PM ^
Whatever ... WE STILL NEED TO BRING JIMMY BACK HOME!!!
/s
- - -
Really, it's OK to be unenthusiastic (to put it mildly) about how things have gone over the past three years. I just have a hard time understanding the unconditional love (perhaps best exemplified by Rosenberg's fawning columns) people have for Harbaugh. He's done a great job at Stanford, but he hasn't been perfect. Also, what if he's really not enthusiastic about coming back? Does anyone know for sure? You might ask why he'd want to expose himself to such a childish and whiny fan base.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:06 PM ^
There's one person who will know for sure, if he doesn't already, and that's Mr. David Brandon.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:10 AM ^
I wouldn't say unconditional love, but I think the single most important factor in Harbaugh's favor is his recruiting acumen. HIs ability to bring top-tier talent to Stanford is strong evidence that he will be able to bring top talent to Michigan, despite our down years. Fair or not, Rodriguez has had trouble recruiting such talent, and the more mediocre years we have the harder it will be to dig out of that hole.
November 28th, 2010 at 9:46 AM ^
I'm not in the "Harbaugh or bust" camp. I think Jim would be a solid choice for the next HC at UM, but there are other good options available.
I just think it is time for RR to go...now.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:06 PM ^
Dude, drop it. Get over the comments Harbaugh made a few years ago. Who cares. He loves Michigan and said what he did in spite. Yes it was dumb but move on. If those comments actually would hold Michigan fans back from wanting him as our head coach, you're being extremely stubborn and naive to think that other coaches, including RichRod, are perfect angels.
The fact is Harbaugh had made Stanford into a great team and could do the same here at Michigan. I've supported Rich through and through the last few years but I'm tired of telling everyone who will listen that Rich will eventually make us great and our offense will be incredible. Why? Because after three years there has been little indication that Rich is capable of making us into a winning team, let alone a competitive team.
Us RichRod supporters just need to call it like it is. Rich is a good coach and I guarantee that he will be incredible at his next school. However, he hasn't won here and I doubt he ever will. Jim Harbaugh, a former Ann Arbor native and Michigan QB nonetheless, has shown he can win (and win big) at a school on par with Michigan from an athletic and academic perspective which gives me enough reason to believe that he will be successful here. And, we all know that RichRod has never been fully supported here in a2. That absolutely would not be the case with Harbaugh.
So, in conclusion, Harbaugh would be the ideal candidate to be our next coach. The more you post here about why he isn't because he's such a bad man, the more you're lying to yourself. The guy would own Ann Arbor and knows exactly what Michigan football is all about. From his intense attitude to being an alum and to having a true understanding of our particular rivalries we have with other schools, Harbaugh is perfect for this job. He's got my vote.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:16 PM ^
I want to see the evidence that has Jim Harbaugh on the record stating that he "loves Michigan" I am going on the fact he ripped the school that I give my hard earned money to year after year in season tickets and funding the athletic program. This guys personal record: a DUI, a $50K+ bathroom, constant NFL attention, leads me to reject him Prima facie.
He indeed seems like someone who can coach 'em up. But, his personal record and callous disregard, on the record I might add, of his alma mater, lead me to question his judgement off the field.
How is 3 years enough time? Is 7-5 not what you expected at the beginning of the year? If you thought more well I commend you, but the spread is not dead.
And I don't want to be Notre Dame.... 3 years and you get the door? That is not enough time in college. I'm sorry, but I need four years at least.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:25 PM ^
I want to see the evidence that has Jim Harbaugh on the record stating that he "loves Michigan"
You're right, he hates Michigan, just like Roy Williams always hated North Carolina.
Are you for real? Put it this way -- if Harbaugh doesn't love Michigan you have nothing to worry about, because he wouldn't want to be the coach here. Unfortunately, you have no clue what you're talking about, and everyone in the world other than you that he would very much love to coach his alma mater, in the town that he grew up in, where his dad was a coach, where he used to come back every year for charity events, etc. etc.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:52 PM ^
you want it to be so, doesn't mean it is. Again, where is the evidence? You say he loves Michigan and have no clue what I'm talking about, but that proves my point. Show me the proof that he would "love" to coach here. I'm going from the evidence, not your hopes and wet dreams.
The evidence, his own words, states that he shit on Michigan.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:37 PM ^
This is hopeless. I've defended Rich a lot in the last few years, especially lately. I just can't do it anymore.
Everyone is laughing at us right now. And it sucks. The last few years I would basically make myself believe that things will get better but they haven't. I don't need to see any charts, or graphs, or whatever it is that proves thing will get better. It's a false hope. Unfortunately Rich hasn't proved to be the right coach for Michigan and we need to move on.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:40 PM ^
of that false hope being peddled these days. Hang in there.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:04 AM ^
I don't need to see any charts, or graphs, or whatever it is that proves thing will get better. It's a false hope. Unfortunately Rich hasn't proved to be the right coach for Michigan and we need to move on.
Fortunately for everyone, Dave Brandon will take a much more systematic approach in evaluating the program. And, based on his statements to date, it seems pretty clear that he will give RR at least one more year.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:38 PM ^
the same 7-5 you anticipated? Meaning, of the games UM won, did you count everyone of those as wins or did you assume somewhere, UM would knock off a good team?
Curious, because I'm reading about what the MGO community 'expected'. 7-5's aren't all the same.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:02 AM ^
the same no matter which way you slice it. I'm sorry, but a win is a win.
Losses to 1 loss co-conference champions. State, Wisky, Ohio St. Understandable, albeit not fun to watch and tough to swallow. These teams have better players at all phases of the game.
Loss to Iowa and Penn St. - Defenses laden with upper classmen.
We loss to every team, save Penn St, that we should have loss to. We beat every team we should have. It was ugly and its not what the ceiling is for this team, but it is reality.
How is Harbaugh going to magically coach up another batch of young players? We will be right back to 2008. Then there is another 3 years wasted to turnover the roster again. No matter what offense he runs, its unlikely Tate stays as J-Force did not play a lick when he transferred there.
The dividend of Rich Rod's recruits are about to payoff in spades. Just sit tight.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:23 AM ^
To beat Ohio State today? I mean, a win is a win. Who you beat doesn't matter.
<br>
<br>And there's no evidence a change is "2008 all over again". Maybe Harbaugh or whoever retains some coaches, players, adapts his system...all things coaches going into a new place USUALLY do.
November 28th, 2010 at 1:18 AM ^
Yeah I'm sorry I have to agree with Fuzzy Dunlop here, there is a difference between records. You definitely have to look between the numbers.
While I came on here preseason and predicted 7-5, this was not the 7-5 I predicted. I didn't guarantee any blowout wins or losses, but I expected that the losses we had we would be handed our butts to us not shoot ourselves in the foot.
The fact that the games against MSU, Iowa, PSU, Wisconsin, and OSU could have seen different outcomes had this team executed and played better football is by far THE most frustrating thing about this season. Had those teams dominated ours in every aspect of the game then I could understand, but they didn't, we just killed ourselves.
Chalk it up to whatever you want, inexperience, whatever, it's a bit telling when your team hasn't even won one game against one of these teams and has lost in embarassing fashion each time.
December 4th, 2010 at 9:37 AM ^
is there really anything you can do except give these guys more time with their coach? 19 starters +2 specialists returning. If RR can retain his roster, then the execution should get better with time.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:29 PM ^
Most of what you say in support of Harbaugh (which essentially boils down to "he's a MICHIGAN MAN (TM)") could have been said just as truthfully about Les Miles 3 years ago. Today, do you still wish we had Les Miles?
I think it's a good idea to look for a coach-of-the-moment who achieved a great deal of success at a non-traditional powerhouse. He'll be guaranteed to turn us around, immediately! Oh wait, we tried that already. His name was Rich Rodriguez.
My serious questions for the Harbaugh camp are these:
1) What makes you think his transistion at MI will be any less painful than RR's? Basically, it's the same issue - wrong personnel for the scheme.
2) What makes you think Michigan would be a final destination for Harbaugh? He's shown interest in the NFL - would he really stay at UM if a HC job opened up in the league?
3) Do you truly believe that Jim Harbaugh would produce a better 2011 than Rich Rodriguez?
My position, sick as I am after today, is basically what it was two weeks ago. The defense is god-awful, and a good chunk of that is coaching related. The offense is good, and will likely be very good once our QB is not a first year starter (basically, I think Denard has regressed since mid-season, but I don't think this is unusual for a first-year guy - he may be falling back on bad habits against tougher competition, because he hasn't had all that much time to get his old HS habits coached out of him).
We need a complete re-set of the defensive staff. I think experience will make us better next year regardless of the coach, but I have no confidence in Gerg to make the D any better than mediocre even with great personnel. Rich Rod deserves one more year with Denard to see if he can continue to grow. If we fire Rich Rod and go for someone like Harbaugh, 2011 will be remarkably painful. We probably see 2008 level attrition, I bet we lose some of our recruits, etc. I just don't think it's possible for us to be better than mediocre if we get a pro-style coach for 2011. Maybe we could do better than that with a spread guy, but I still think our best chance for a competitive Big Ten season is RR with a totally re-vamped defensive staff.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:42 PM ^
You seem pretty rational and I agree that a transition wouldn't be any fun (and no, I don't want Les). Maybe you're right and Harbaugh isn't the right fit for the job. That could be true. I just don't think Rich is right for it. Do you?
November 27th, 2010 at 11:58 PM ^
I guess I don't get the "right fit" argument. You can either win or you can't. I honestly believe the jury is out on Rich (though a good chunk of that is his own fault). Basically, I just don't know the right answer. But, since I don't know the right answer, I think firing a coach after three years is the wrong decision.
Jim Harbaugh has shown he can win at Stanford. What we don't know is if he can sustain wins - can he rebuild when Luck graduates? How will they play when everyone is gunning for them? The Pac Ten was really lousy this year (outside of Oregon and Stanford) - how will Stanford look next season? Conversely, the Big Ten was unusually strong this year - how much better is success in the Pac Ten this year compared to mediocrity in the Big Ten?
There are a couple questions Dave Brandon has to ask: who gives us the best chance to win next year? Who gives us the best chance to win 5 years from now? The first question favors Rich Rod, in my opinion. The second, I'm 50-50 on, but then I also have to balance that against the chance that Harbaugh comes here, has a couple good seasons, and bounces for the NFL.
November 28th, 2010 at 12:03 AM ^
A master of prose. Hard Edge to the enth degree, good sir!
November 28th, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
Jim Harbaugh has shown he can win at Stanford. What we don't know is if he can sustain wins - can he rebuild when Luck graduates? How will they play when everyone is gunning for them? The Pac Ten was really lousy this year (outside of Oregon and Stanford) - how will Stanford look next season? Conversely, the Big Ten was unusually strong this year - how much better is success in the Pac Ten this year compared to mediocrity in the Big Ten?
And yet, all these same questions can not only be asked, but in my opinion, have already been answered about our current coach.
November 27th, 2010 at 11:47 PM ^
I'm not pro-Rodriguez or pro-Harbaugh. But some answers to your questions:
I think it's a good idea to look for a coach-of-the-moment who achieved a great deal of success at a non-traditional powerhouse. He'll be guaranteed to turn us around, immediately! Oh wait, we tried that already. His name was Rich Rodriguez.
You mentioned this after Miles. Neither LSU, nor WVU are anywhere around the level of Stanford. WVU is the winningest program without a national title. Rodriguez took them from good to very good.
1) What makes you think his transistion at MI will be any less painful than RR's? Basically, it's the same issue - wrong personnel for the scheme.
I've watched Andrew Luck run the read option several times this year. Do you think Harbaugh would essentially run a DeBord-esque pro set?
2) What makes you think Michigan would be a final destination for Harbaugh? He's shown interest in the NFL - would he really stay at UM if a HC job opened up in the league?
No pro or anti-Harbaugh person knows this. But the fact that he played QB at Michigan and idolizes Bo? You can see why some people might presume he'd want to play shining white knight.
3) Do you truly believe that Jim Harbaugh would produce a better 2011 than Rich Rodriguez?
If he brings a mid-50s defense and has almost everyone returning on offense? I could see it. This has everything to do with your personal perceptions of Harbaugh's coaching ability.